MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229899084 · doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2020.0053

Error in Text

2020· erratum· en· W4229899084 on OpenAlexafffund
Nariman Sepehrvand, Wendimagegn Alemayehu, Justin A. Ezekowitz

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Cardiology · 2020
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare cost, quality, practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaCanadian VIGOUR CentreCanadiana.org
FundersNational Institutes of HealthAlberta InnovatesAmerican RegentSanofiZOLL Medical CorporationBristol-Myers SquibbAstraZenecaZOLL FoundationAmgenNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstitutePfizerCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Washington
KeywordsMedicineMEDLINEInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Reply We thank Fernandes et al for their interest in our study 1 and agree that this field requires further exploration. Explanatory trials are primed to maximize the likelihood of finding efficacy of an intervention by testing it in an ideal setting, whereas pragmatic trials aim to test effectiveness of an intervention in a more generalizable setting. Hence, they are expected to generate more generalizable results, with the risk understood that there may be more variation in less tightly controlled environments, which may result in differing results.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0070.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.008

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.563
GPT teacher head0.546
Teacher spread0.018 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA CardiologySame topicHealthcare cost, quality, practicesFrench-language works237,207